Parliament and National Theatre; Two Identical Twins Separated by a Road

By Badru Walusansa

The National Theatre is the central venue for music, drama and comedy shows. Adjacent to it is the Parliament of Uganda – ideally a place that should be the national treasure for policy formulation, oversight and appropriation. However, it now appears like Parliament wants to outshine the National Theatre by becoming a temple of theatrics and demagoguery.

Currently, Parliament has made Ugandans more confident that the country can still function without it. Who would want a Parliament that is a rubber stamp, a Parliament that acts outside the will of the people, and a Parliament that fronts its own interests over those of the citizens?

To validate this seemingly tough scrutiny on Parliament, we may sooner rather than later need an opinion poll to establish whether it is still a going concern or not. Perhaps the results from such a poll may not surprise many because they already appear predetermined.

While Ugandans have painfully sustained such a large Parliament with a huge expenditure budget, the audit reveals limited return on investment. Not because Parliament has not passed laws, but because many of those laws are against the will of the people. Not because there are no debates in Parliament, but because the quality of debate is sometimes disappointing. Not because there are no voices in Parliament, but because voices of reason are often marginalised.

Ugandans are disappointed in Parliament because, unlike the Executive or Judiciary where their say is almost immaterial, they believe Parliament should be the institution where their voices are amplified. However, this has increasingly turned into a fallacy because many people now describe Parliament as a crime scene where the Constitution has repeatedly been molested through the removal of presidential term and age limits.

The latest “crime” is the overthrow of the people’s sovereignty following the passing of the sovereignty bill in whatever form, despite wider public rejection.

The damaging image of Parliament may even render public relations experts helpless. Other than being perceived as a place where political drama is staged, a clearance house and annexure of the Executive, what else is Parliament known for that can soothe the growing public outrage?

Many Ugandans also think it is a place where money and smartly dressed women and men meet for political trade-offs.

I further think Parliament’s redemption will require the direct input of the people, especially through subjecting MPs to higher standards. MPs’ performance should be assessed on tangible indicators based on their cardinal roles, and voters should hold them more accountable.

This is not to say that all MPs represent the biblical nine lepers who failed to return. There are some whose conscience remains intact and who have laboured to execute their delegated responsibilities in the best interests of Ugandans.

Having ardently followed the infamous Protection of Sovereignty Bill, I wish to cite two MPs who stamped their feet down not only to reject the bill but also to extend value to their “bosses”, the people of Uganda.

The first MP is Anna Ebaju Adeke, the Soroti Woman MP, who insisted on continuing with public submissions as a sign of respect to Ugandans who had turned up at Parliament to submit memoranda regarding the sovereignty bill.

This came after the joint committee on Defence and Legal Affairs became divided on whether to suspend the session and attend the main parliamentary sitting. Hon. Adeke explained to the committee that suspending the public hearing would amount to disrespecting Ugandans.

This gesture moved many because she did not just act, she acted in the best interest of the people of Uganda at that moment.

The second MP is Jonathan Odur, the outgoing Erute South County MP, who put up a spirited fight while presenting the minority report on the sovereignty bill.

One could tell that Hon. Odur firmly spoke what many Ugandans opposed to the bill would have said themselves. No doubt, history will absolve these two MPs and many others who have not relegated their constitutional responsibilities.

It is our responsibility as Ugandans to continuously demand that Parliament applies a human face while discharging its mandate. This is the only way it can detach itself from its alleged twin across the road, the National Theatre, if Ugandans are to take it seriously again.

However, should Ugandans ever be asked to auction Parliament any day, any time, the ayes will likely have it, and they may even help pass it on to the lowest bidder.

The author is a socio-political analyst.